microformats vs. semantic XHTML (was Re: [uf-discuss] Commentsfrom IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)

Siegfried Gipp siegfried at rorkvell.de
Thu Dec 14 05:43:41 PST 2006

Am Donnerstag, 14. Dezember 2006 00:36 schrieb Mike Schinkel:
> Is seems to me Tantek you are saying here and in other emails that, on one
> hand "there is no distinction between official and unofficial microformats"
> and on the other hand "they are microformats if and only if they follow the
> principles and the process."  Either all semantic class names are
> microformats or there is a difference between microformats that follow the
> rules and those that don't. You can't have it both ways.
Well, that's a matter of definition. Take f.ex. one of my pages: 
This is a page which aims to combine the ideas of microformats with the Dublin 
Core vocabulary. This is by definition _no_ microformat, since this did not 
go through any process other than my own thoughts. But it is semantic markup 
and it is somewhat similar to microformats, it even sports an XMDP profile. 
But still it is _no_ microformat.

To convert that to a microformat that proposal would have to go through the 
microformats process.

Simply a matter of definition. In this context, "microformats" may be 
considered to be something like a "brand". 


More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list